1. Field of the Invention
The present invention is directed to a system and method for identifying accurate apparel size to fit a consumer prior to purchase, and in particular, to a system and method for correlating a size of a target item based on the size of a source item that fits without requiring a body measurement even among different brands and styles.
2. Description of Related Art
Finding the correct size in an article of clothing represents one of the most challenging aspects of making apparel purchases. Today, consumers have a wide variety of channels through which to make apparel purchases. However their ability to select the correct size in an item still very much remains a matter of trial and error.
Traditionally, consumers visit a retail store and try on apparel in a fitting room. The problem with this approach is that it is necessary to try on multiple sizes for any particular item, unless the customer knows his or her appropriate size in advance. This ad hoc approach requires significant resources for retailers—inventory is tied up, non-fitting items must be re-stocked, and staff is required to supervise fitting rooms. This approach is also less than ideal for shoppers who find it time consuming to visit a brick-and-mortar store to try on different sizes.
Increasingly, consumers today are shopping online via the Internet. With growth rates ranging from 21%-72% per year since 1999, online apparel retail (“e-tail”) sales are the largest and fastest-growing category in the United States. While the industry's $22.1 billion size and large growth rates are impressive, the online apparel retailer segment has yet to reach their full potential because it is faced with two major problems: (i) a high volume of returns with the most prevalent reason for returns being incorrect size; and (ii) reluctance to buy online in the first place due to sizing uncertainty. In an attempt to overcome sizing uncertainty, it is not uncommon for consumers to purchase two or three of the same item in different sizes with the intention to keep only a single item that fits best and return the other items. Returned merchandise diminishes top-line sales figures for e-tailers. For example, the e-tailer can only resell a percentage of returned merchandise and then, on average, it must be priced below original retail value. Millions of dollars are lost as a result of returns due to improper sizing. In addition to the direct losses associated with returned items, many e-tailers offer free return service to consumers as an incentive to purchase online. Apparel websites spend an average of $9 per item on the entire return process—this includes staffing a customer service center, postage, and restocking fees.
Though significant, the price tag on the apparel industry's sizing problem is actually much bigger than simply the costs associated with returns. In a brick-and-mortar setting, money is left on the table when retailers invest resources on shoppers who spend significant time trying on clothes only to find that none of the articles fit or that the correct size is not available. In addition, some consumers avoid shopping for clothing simply because they do not have the time or desire to go through the hassle of using the fitting room. In an online setting, the shopper's lack of viable options for selecting the correct size in an article of clothing exponentially increases the loss of potential sales to e-tailers. Studies show that the most common reason browsers are not converted to buyers is because they are “unsure of accurate sizing.” Further proof of this issue is evidenced in the industry's extremely low browse-to-buy ratio of only 2.2 purchases for every 100 browsers. By increasing browse-to-buy conversions by just a fraction, e-tailers would see their top-line sales figures jump significantly. Another intangible cost inextricably tied to the sizing issue is lost customer loyalty that the e-tailers experience when the online customer is dissatisfied with his or her purchase. Research shows that 11% of dissatisfied online apparel customers will not shop on the site again. Therefore, the inability to provide shoppers with easy, accurate and convenient sizing recommendations costs apparel retailers billions of dollars in potential sales.
In an attempt to mitigate size related costs, sizing charts may be provided in the retail store (e.g., via a printed chart or kiosk) or accessible on the Internet to aid in determining the consumer's size. These conventional sizing charts are often inaccurate because they force the individual to choose a size based on “standard” body measurements. Few individuals fit into a single standardized body proportion classification or category. In addition, consumers are required to take a plurality of body measurements before they are provided with these size recommendations. Calculating a body measurement requires certain tools such as a measuring tape, which is something that may not be readily accessible by the consumer (e.g., when the consumer is in the retail store or when purchasing an item via the internet while at work). Another problem associated with requiring body measurements as a precondition to a sizing recommendation is that the accuracy of the result is completely dependent on the accuracy of the underlying body measurement. Many measurements such as bust line require that the measurement be obtained at a specific location on the body not readily appreciated by the average layperson or consumer. One could educate the consumer, in advance, as to the precise body location and method by which a particular body measurement is to be measured; however, once again this requires additional effort and time on the part of the consumer and is still subject to error if not conducted in accordance with those precise instructions. Still another disadvantage to requiring a body measurement is that some measurements, for example, inseam, are difficult to obtain without assistance. An underlying flaw associated with such conventional sizing or fitting systems is that if the underlying body measurement is inaccurate then clearly the recommended size will also be incorrect.
Some websites have been developed that are devoted to addressing the problem of size by identifying the ideal clothing articles, styles, and one or more sizes of apparel for one's body measurements and/or body type. Examples include zafu.com, myshape.com, and truejeans.com. Consumers are required when using these websites to fill out numerous data entry fields as to body measurement and/or body type before their recommendation is processed. As previously explained, such measurements require access to a tape measure and thus are not very user friendly. Another disadvantage associated with these online sizing websites is that the consumer is restricted to the brands and styles sponsored by select e-tailers. These solutions are less than ideal since online shoppers typically visit their favorite websites and attempt to find their size in an item of their choosing, rather than the other way around. In fact, the current online sizing sites can often exacerbate rather than solve the problems faced by online apparel retailers. First, these sites often provide the consumer with a range of possible size recommendations comprising two to three sizes corresponding to the consumer's body type. As previously mentioned, when faced with such a dilemma the consumer often purchases multiple sizes of a single item and thereafter returns those sizes that do no fit. In addition, these sites require the consumer to leave the e-tailer's website to obtain the size recommendation thereby reducing the likelihood of a potential purchase for that e-tailer as the shopper is redirected to another website.
Given the problems that apparel sizing uncertainty creates for shoppers and retailers, it is desirable to develop an improved sizing system and method that is user friendly, time efficient, does not require body measurements and may generate comparative size recommendations among different brands and styles.